LDS view on other Christians

[kstevens67]

I heard something the other day I never knew. Perhaps this is just another misconception of the LDS Church.

"Mormons hold the belief that the rest of christianity is apostate."

Now I am familiar with the apostasy, but have never heard it put in this context. Isn't the apostasy simply a mass exit of the Church of Jesus Christ? If Christians (Other faiths) have not joined then how can they be apostates? Perhaps I am just over thinking this or maybe this is just a misconception about the LDS Church.

Sorry if this is a double post, I received and emil stating I needed to register agains and activate my account after posting my initial one.

I may have more questions. With a Mormon running for president, I receive many more questions (a good thing), some of which I'm not sure how to answer, although I have some ideas.

Edited October 28, 2012 by pam
We can't mention candidate names

[pam]

Actually I don't think we believe that the rest of Christianity is apostate.

We have always stated that other religions hold truths. They just don't have ALL the truths that we have.

[Dravin]

It's really going to boil down to how you're viewing apostasy. Clearly the rest of modern Christianity hasn't joined the Church and then left it or rejected all truth. But if one looks at it as a state of not having the fullness of the Gospel then one could characterize them from that point of view as apostate, in a sense that they're inheritors of apostasy stemming from the Great Apostasy. Really boils down to if your focusing on the turning away from truth or on being removed from the truth (though not necessarily completely devoid of it) as in a people in a general state of apostasy. For example, if you'd feel comfortable saying, the world was in a state of apostasy from the death of the Apostles to the Restoration than you know what I'm talking about concerning apostasy in the latter sense. The dictionary definitions I'm seeing are focusing on the turning away, on the act versus the state, and I would disagree with a characterization of the rest of Christianity as being engaged in turning away from truth.

Edited October 28, 2012 by Dravin

[Anddenex]

Apostate, is also in reference to the Apostasy, as you have shared. We know, and we preach that Christianity fell into apostasy after the death of the Apostles in the NT.

Thus, theologically and by definition, it could easily be said that all of Christianity, before the restoration, was apostate, or in other words had fallen away from truth, the fullness of the truth.

Without the restoration of the gospel of Jesus Christ, we would still be in apostasy, and thus apostate.

However, it would be hard to liken, or call in our day, Christianity apostate. True apostasy is having the fullness, or having a portion, and forsaking the portion of truth a person once had.

Thus, a Mormon who forsakes his religion, is in an apostate condition. A Christian which forsakes their faith, for atheism, agnosticism, or any other religion, is in an apostate condition as well.

Thus, today, it is better said (as Pam mentioned), that we believe all religions have truth, some more than others, and ask them to bring their truths with them, and allow us to add the fullness of the gospel.

[prisonchaplain]

A safer and more accurate word might be heterodox...LDS and other Christians disagree with each other on many doctrines...we see each other as falling short on right-teaching. Nevertheless, we are all striving to be, not apostate, but apostolic, right?

[Vort]

I think it's a blunt assessment, but essentially correct. Larger Christianity is in apostasy -- hence the need for a restoration. We do not normally talk about or even think about things in those terms, but I do believe those terms are ultimately correct.

[skippy740]

There are two ways to look at this concept... and both are correct.

1) The rest of Christianity doesn't have the full doctrine available, and therefore limits their eternal progression. These are good people. However, unless they convert to the true gospel of Jesus Christ, their eternal progression is limited to the Terrestrial Kingdom... a typical definition of heaven that they describe. "In my father's house, there are many mansions. I go prepare a place for you."

2) While their doctrines will limit their eternal progression, they are also a part of the general "church of Christ"... just not a member of the restored church. I look at other Christians as brothers in the Christian faith... particularly as they follow and teach the teachings of Christ. Just because they aren't LDS doesn't mean that we can't agree on basic tenants of faith. They are not my doctrinal enemy just because they have a different "flavor of faith" in Christ than I do.

There have been other past statements from church leaders on this topic. Personally, I like Neil A. Maxwell's talk about irreligion - and I liken that to being the Church of the Devil.

Other past statements equated the Catholic Church (of the past) to the Church of the Devil as referenced by Bruce R. McConkie. In my opinion, the Church of the Devil can be anyone at anytime who chooses to serve man (themselves or other Ruler) over God and His commandments. It is not necessarily a particularly organized religion under 1 name... aside from Satanism itself.